Collateral effects on non-target tissue are worse with pulsed-field ablation than with radiofrequency ablation, according to a study published April 24 in JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology.
The multicenter study, led by researchers from the Kansas City (Kan.) Heart Rhythm Institute, analyzed data from 871 patients who underwent pulsed-field ablation or radiofrequency ablation beginning March 2024 and onward.
Here are four notes on the study:
- Of the 773 patients who underwent pulsed-field ablation, 70.9% were with a pentaspline system, 14.1% with a circular multielectrode, 12.4% with a spherical and 2.3% with a variable loop catheter.
- Post-procedural changes associated with pulsed-field ablation included higher levels of troponin, lactate dehydrogenase and haptoglobin biomarkers, compared to the levels associated with radiofrequency ablation.
These changes were dose-dependent and varied across the pulsed-field ablation systems used. - There was also significant change in left atrial ejection fraction associated with pulsed-field ablation compared to radiofrequency ablation, at -5.0% and -20.0%, respectively.
- “As [pulsed-field ablation] becomes mainstream, future studies appraising these effects and understanding the short term and long-term implications are needed,” the study authors wrote.
Read the full study here.
